Cutting to the chase. 23HR/STC, or 24TS-E/HCam?

[GrahamWelland]

Mid-height Burj Khalifa

I notice that the 23HR is sharp enough to bring on moire even with the IQ180 in both the Burj Khalifa and Top of the Address shots.

 

[Stefan Steib]

Hi Gerald

I always use the 17 and the 24mm TS-E´s at f11 or even f11,5.
The loss in diffraction is tiny and can be easily compensated in post with Capture One, the gain in Corner sharpness is worth much more. it has also to be said that it is a good idea not to focus in the center but in a ringform at about 30 % from center. This is due to the comparably strong field curvature.

There is an advantage of the 24mm against the 23HR -it has more movements (about 6-8mm depending on the distance with our tuneup) ! And no LCC needed nor any center filter. So focusing and overall usage will be MUCH faster, mainly because of the 2Stops brighter image..............

And, last but not least, with the centerfilter and a decent shutter it´s 4x maybe 5 times the price of the Canon (1800€ to 7800€ in Germany), so it better be somehow superior.

Regards
Stefan

 

[goesbang]

We should make this happen.

Bryan Siebel - you about?

I know Bryan has the Alpa and the 23HR and is very accomplished with it. Maybe the 32HR too, if not, I'm sure he can get hold of one. Would be interesting to see the 32HR shifted against the 23.

Let's do this in Dubai. I'll put you up in a hotel for a couple of nights if you cover the airfare Stefan

I will be living in Switzerland from April, so maybe Stefan and I can get together in either Switzerland or Germant to do this. I am keen to see what we get.

 

[Stefan Steib]

Hi Brian

Yes I live close to the swiss border now, so no problem. But I will as well be in Dubai again later this year. Lets see - one way or the other !

Regards
Stefan

 

[FSOT]

Nope, SWA rise only up to 25mm. STC shift left/right 18mm either way (but ofcourse easy to turn for rise/fall).

The Rodenstock HR 28mm can only physical shift 20mm on the SWA due to interference of the lens rear housing.

 

[FSOT]

I am with Guy on the 28mm HR. I think this is perhaps the most versatile lens with extremely high resolution.

 

[gerald.d]

Hmm.

Ok, not so much night-and-day between these two when you stop the Canon down to f/16. Thread over at LuLa with the results...

 

[gazwas]

Great test again Gerald.

That Canon is one fine lens and Canon are giving them away when you compare it to the Rodie.

So have you purchased both of these lenses or are you looking to purchase?

 

[gerald.d]

Great test again Gerald.

That Canon is one fine lens and Canon are giving them away when you compare it to the Rodie.

So have you purchased both of these lenses or are you looking to purchase?

I'm fortunate enough to have them both. I'm actually on my second 24TSE. It was one of my most used lenses when I was using Canon gear, and I sold it to help finance the purchase of the IQ180. Then I got the HCam, and bought another!

I never expected to own a 23HR, but came by one recently. Ultimately, if you don't need to shift much, there's no doubting in my mind that it's a better lens than the Canon, but after seeing what the Canon can do stopped down, there's not a lot in it. The fact that the Canon can be used on the FPS is a significant advantage too.

 

[gazwas]

Yes. I take back all my doubts about the FPS when the Canon lenses can perform like this on an IQ180. I imagine it opens up many more opportunities.

No question the Rodie performs better and it should but you'd have to be looking very hard to tell any differences and of course own a copy of each lens.

Its funny, we're all told how much better the HR glass is than anything else and we all just take it as gospel. However, if you showed these shots without disclosing the lens it was shot with, would we all spot the difference and get 100% correct?

And at what stage do we say that's good enough?

 

[Stefan Steib]

There is something else:

the Canon is f3,5 the Rodenstock is f5,6. Even without using a centerfilter that´s MUCH brighter and more exact to focus (especially for wideangle at infinity !).

The "better" result at higher openings of the Rodie is relative as if you use a centerfilter they are on par again but with better depth of field for the canon.........

and finally the speed of usage: as I guess most people use their Rodenstock or Schneider lenses still on mech. shutters, the steps to go to shoot are plenty, the HCam just takes slide and shoot (Shutter closes automatically, lens steps down automatically - exposure).

Greetings from Germany
Stefan

 

[gerald.d]

Focusing wise, the larger aperture of the Canon isn't advantageous with live view. It's useful if you're using ground glass of course, but I find it much easier and quicker to set the focus distance on the lens, shoot, review and adjust if necessary.

(for the comparative test I did yesterday, just setting both lenses on infinity was sufficient)